Methodology
Every review produces five sub-scores out of ten. The weighted average is the headline number. No project pays for coverage and no score is negotiable after publication — we update it only when the facts change.
Technology
25%We read the deployed contracts, not the docs. Verified source, contract size, upgrade paths and whether shipped behaviour matches the specification.
Team & track record
15%Named or pseudonymous, what they shipped before, and how they behaved when something previously broke.
Tokenomics
25%Supply schedule, unlock cliffs, and yield decomposed into real revenue versus emissions. Headline APY on its own tells us nothing.
Security posture
25%Audit count is the least interesting part. We look at findings resolved, admin key powers, timelocks, and whether an incident response plan exists.
Community
10%Governance participation, whether criticism survives in public channels, and holder distribution.
Automatic caps
- Unverified contracts holding user funds cap the score at 4.0
- An admin key that can pause withdrawals without a timelock caps the score at 5.0
- Undisclosed insider allocations cap the score at 5.5
- Advertised yield that is more than 80% emissions caps the score at 6.0